I just tried out a Z at the Sony Store -- sweet! The 15" MBP is huge and heavy by comparison. I really feel that Apple is not offering a compelling upgrade this time -- and even upping the base model price by $100! Reply

It seems like the volume discount from shipping exclusively 7200 RPM drives on a "pro" machine would've made more sense than a bunch of default configurations with 5400 RPM drives destined to sit in stores.

The Style is rather new, just one and a half years now, isn't it? The prior design lasted for 6 years and my mid 2007 MBP still looks stunning, a timeless design and the aluminum surface is VERY durable. Comparing my almost three year old one to a most other brands with the same age makes people say mine looks like new.Reply

I'm still curious why Apple chose the nVidia GT330M with it's 23W TDP. ATI's Mobility HD5650 is supposed to have a TDP between 15-19W, while still being faster so would seem like the ideal choice if performance/watt is the major concern. Hopefully, Apple developing their on dynamic GPU switching implementation was motivated by trying to make a GPU agnostic method to not be tied to say nVidia and Optimus. Presumably, the GT330M drivers are more mature in OS X due to similarity with existing nVidia GPUs and that combined with price and bundling offers with the 320M cause Apple to choose nVidia in this round, but hopefully ATI isn't permanently locked out of Apple notebooks.

It's also interesting to note that the GT330M is underclocked at 500MHz core versus up to 575MHz and 1100MHz shaders versus up to 1265MHz being supported by nVidia. Apple's clocks actually match the GT230M. If this was done to reduce power consumption and thermals, that's another reason the HD5650 would have been a better choice.Reply

Or simply opting for 335M (50% more shader cores) would boost graphics performance even more. Though with the heat comments, maybe that isn't such as good idea. I'm reminded with the quite unsatisfactory heat performance (i.e. OMG WTF THIS IS BOILING) of my first gen Macbook Pro (early 2006) with some of the comments in this article. Worrisome. Care to post some temps?Reply

seriously? Didn't the 15" get the 9600GT in the two higher level ones?

The 9400M was a 13" MBP model and also for the base 15". But clearly the 330M GT is designed to replace the 9600M GT not the 9400M. The 320M GT now in the 13" MBPs is designed to replace the 9400M. The base 15" MBP got an upgrade this year from 9400M to 330M GT, but it's clearly two different classes.

I would've preferred if you benched the 330M GT against the 9600M GT which was an upgrade to the old 8600M GT that I have from an early 2008 MBP. The 9400M is just the wrong card to bench against.Reply

aww how unfortunate. I just figured that since you put the 2.53 ghz MBP in comparison that it would be the 9600M one. Oh well. I'm glad you at least included my 2008 MBP in the benches (way to make me feel like I need to upgrade :D )

You know, that used to be my thought as well, and I was totally concerned back when the first notebook form factor 7200 RPM drives swung around, but there's no truth to those assumptions anymore. In fact, back then I found that the newer 7kRPM drive actually gave me *better* battery life and reported cooler temps through SMART. Not sure how, but that's just how it worked out. Obviously there are going to be small differences, but there's also that HUGI (hurry up and get idle) consideration to be made here the same way intel rationalizes turbo mode on a notebook; get the task done fast, then go into a low power state. It ends up being a net energy savings.

But it's obvious that heat/battery aren't the real reasons; the 7K RPM drives are still options, just not default. $50 isn't that much for a "pro" notebook is my point.

At the same point, a platter drive is a platter drive; the performance gains aren't going to be anywhere near what you'll see with an SSD, so perhaps it makes more sense to just forget about upgrading the HDD and save the $50 for your SSD. There are arguments for both I suppose.

I am disappointed, once again, that apple slapped on crappy TN panels to their MacBook Pro.Use of IPS panels in iPad, new iMacs, and new Cinema Displays were welcome changes for the better(far superior viewing angle, color integrity). Why not in the Pro line of MacBook ?!Reply

That's retarded. When referring to laptop the margins/difference in hardware and much less than comparing vehicles. It's the same hard drive, same memory, etc. A car may be a car but the process of getting there is absolutely different, less being the same part.

Now if you were to say, why not buy a car with almost the same parts and materials, slap on a Mercedes logo, and charge a premium for it then that would make more sense.Reply

Prolly the odd man out, but I'm waiting for a review of the 13 inch model. I was already pretty much decided on the MBP 13in anyways, so any upgrades for the same price is a perk.

The lack of Arrandale kinda hurts though; I'm also wondering if the nVidia 320M makes things run any hotter. I'd love to hear a good reason why Apple skipped the Core i3 and stuck with the Core Duo. I'm assuming it was a space concern due to the whole Intel/NVidia chip kerfuffle and they wanted to keep the same sized chassis?

I second the request for a 13" review. I'd like to see how the 320M stacks up, as well as some real world battery tests. Re: an Arrandale update for the 13" in the fall, sounds like Apple may as well wait until Sandy Bridge?Reply

The tests of Core-i3 and having to use Intel HD over a speed bump in C2D and Nvidia 320M tell me that Apple made the right choice. I can't see the 13" MBP maintaining the same price point or increasing the battery duration with a discrete GPU.

I think Anand is correct in that the a Fall release is inevitable. While this is is a decent update I think it is meant to be a stopgap for more radical changes. What should have come about 7-8 months later may jut 4-6 months later due to the Arrandale supply issue.

For the next release, the 13" MBP may have to drop the ODD to make room for the component and cooling, and to lessen the blow of the GPU cost. Apple obviously isn't going to offer Blu-ray so I'd say they are just holding onto the internal ODD until offering Mac OS X Restore Discs on a 16GB SD Card is more viable. I don't think they added SD to the 13" and 15" so many years after it was standard, just to say "me too". I think it'll be the new way to restore the disc. It's how I've been doing it for a couple years.

PS: I wish Anand would have mentioned the other aspects of this revision: audio over DisplayPort or HDMI, and force accelerated scrolling.

PPS: I don't recall seeing any mention of how Nvidia Optimus doesn't power down the IGP when the GPU is active. I'd like to see the power usage differences between Windows and Mac OS X on these machines now that Apple has graphics switching in place. It's too bad Optimus won't work under BootCamp.Reply

How easy is it to replace HDs in the new unibody MBPs? I have a 2008 MBP (15") and it takes a great amount of work to disassemble just to change out a hard drive. With HD prices so cheap, it's not too hard to buy a 500gb 7200 RPM drive and stuff it in. However, I'm often discouraged when it takes a lot of tampering. I've disassembled my Wii to mod chip it. I've disassembled camera lenses to blow out dust behind the front element, but I'm not the most hands on guy and I hate repacking things together. I often mess up there.Reply

It's pretty simple. Check iFixit for the 2009 MBPs. You basically take the entire bottom off, about 10 screws, and then a 1-3 screws for the HDD. It'll takes you an extra 2 minutes over the previous models with the latch and door exposing the HDD and battery.Reply

So I read this and I thought 'OK, Anand is impressed with the battery life' so I figured 'Hey why not see how it compares to other laptops?' I had to go to other articles because this review only has Macs - fair enough for the Mac fanbois who won't consider anything else anyway but not for those who might be open-minded. But what did I find? Sadly Windows laptops run an entirely set of battery test suites. 'Completely idle' 'Flash web browsing' (I think the Macs get a big boost by having non-Flash browsing and that seems like a big fudge to me) and then '720p video playback.'

To my surprise, looking at results, the Macbook batery life is NOT super overwhelmingly impressive. Most of the other laptops that have high(er) battery life have CULV CPUs, fair enough they aren't as fast as the MacBook but then they will run any of the 'battery test' suites just as well. The recent Lenovo is however a Core i5 and gets good battery life.

So Anand, please stop the shenanigans with Apple battery life hype and use tests that are actually the same (as much as possible -Safair might not be available on Windows for example) across platforms.Reply

You'll also note that Jarred runs an idle battery test in all of our Windows reviews, that's the most comparable to the light web browsing test. Some of the recent entries we've tested have gotten a lot better but take the Lenovo ThinkPad T410 for example:

Hey dude, show a little respect. I can understand wanting a little perspective but maybe rephrase your request...unless it's a rant, in which case, flame on, sir :)

How about this:

=============

Anand, once you get all three models tested, could you include some comparison battery tests that include Flash as it that is a reality for most webpages(including the comment page I'm typing out right now). In addition, I would love to see a display comparison. I often see this site grumbling about contrast and color range and such with other laptops(recent Asus models, for example) but I would love to see Macbooks thrown into the bunch for comparison.

I should also add that I do have a video playback and flash web browsing test for the MBP, they simply didn't make the final cut for yesterday's review due to time constraints however I'll be adding in the data in the next day or so :)

Hmm, I was all set to get one but now I'm worried about heat and noise issues. I absolutely detest sweaty palms and am very sensitive to machine noise, often preferring my Acer netbook to the Mac as the Acer is silent.

My current machine is an original Core Duo 15" MacBook Pro. It also has two fans (one a bit wobbly) but temperature wise it's fine. Will the new 15" be warmer?

I was also contemplating the SSD 128gb option for an extra $280, for the silence and performance. Will this help it run cooler? Is there a better option in that price range? The Intel SSD seems wonderful but it's $500. Maybe I'll just try to find a single-platter 250gb drive instead.

I have a late 2006 MBP and every since I had a warranty claim on the power brick (it stopped lighting orange/green/off correctly) they sent me a new one which was smaller. I think I figured out over time that it *seemed* like the new brick charged my MBP slower than the old one. Without the old brick I was unable to confirm. As it stands now, it can take up to 4 hours to charge the damn battery, if not longer. And I have two batteries! So hopefully, the new brick has more DC current and charges more quickly. Given a larger battery capacity that's my guess, and warmer laps are the result. And BTW, my MBP can get pretty dang hot when being recharged.Reply

I think it's completely reasonable that Anand doesn't provide results for battery life under Win 7. iyam, if you don't use OS X as your primary OS, you shouldn't get a Mac. It's as simple as that.Reply

I said primary OS, not "only" or "exclusive" OS. It's well-known, for example, that MBPs has some issues on Windows that they don't have on OS X. My point is if you don't plan on running OS X most of the time, get something different.

Anand wrote:"You're paying for the design, build quality and ultimately the right to use OS X. If those things don't matter to you (particularly the OS X item) then you'd be much better off with an ASUS or Dell."

Thanks alot for the great update! However, I was wondering if you have any information on the new 13inch MacBookPro. I was looking to upgrade from an older ThinkPad T61p to the new 13 inch MacBookPro, mainly because I hate the time it takes my ThinkPad to wake (running it in Windows 7, using a Vertex SSD) and more importantly the battery life. Due to having to fly often I was also not happy with a 15inch notebook and thus I was eyeballing the 13inch. It would be great if you could post some benchmarking on the 13inch graphics card. It seems that from general performance alone there is really no need to go to the arandale (4% increase in speed seems marginal), is that true? Thus would you second Steve Job's saying that the more important upgrade was the graphic chip?

do the edges still cut through your wrists as you type?does it still get too hot to touch when doing any sort of intensive task?does the screen still tip over the moment you tilt the laptop forward in your lap?

3Gbps works out of the box (confirmed on Corsair's Force 100GB drive). The system seems to work fine with the SandForce controller, but the same is true for the previous gen. I haven't tried Indilinx yet. Intel also appears to work fine.

Apple doesn't like confirming this kind of stuff, but I'm guessing they are supplied by Toshiba and/or Samsung. If so, the drives are ok but not particularly great. I'd save the upgrade cost and do it yourself aftermarket.

Apples guarantees "Up To" 1,000 battery recharges is complete idiot speek. 7 recharges would comply with that guarantee. That is just the same as saying "not more than". Apple you always double-talk or just outright lie.Reply

I just returned a 2.5 year old battery to Apple a couple months ago because it wasn't holding a charge and only a few hundred cycles on it. It wasn't under any warranty and they gave me a new one right then and there for free. Reply

Also, as a company you have to show proof (based on statistical analysis) for all your advertising claims. Not entirely sure about numbers, but something like 9 in 10 at least should meet the stated (would be 1000 recharges in this case), for you to be able to use 'up to'. You'd be incredibly unlucky to get 7 in reality. Reply

Apple changed my last battery, too... 2.5 years old... it got the Sony problem... swelled up.The internal regulations appeared to be change if less than 300 cycles.Mine was 320 or so and they changed it anyway.

Apple seem pretty good at offering a new battery that fails to meet their advertised expectation so I'm guessing they are going to honour these ones up to 1000 cycles.Reply

"Despite using a NVIDIA GPU, there's no support for Optimus under Windows 7 on the new MacBook Pro. The GeForce GT 330M is always in use there regardless of whether you use an Optimus enabled driver or the 196.21 driver that comes with the MacBook Pro."

That is really BS if you ask me, but who would expect anything less from Apple...Do you forsee any way of a third-party enabling this functionality in the future though, or no?Reply

Arrandale CULV 13-14" 1440x900 res with discrete ATI 5770mobile + GPU switching.... Imagine having up to 10+ hrs battery life for light internet, word processing work related tasks, being able to watch 2-3 dvd's on battery and then plugging in to game on very high for almost every game! CPU would be 1.3-1.5ghz on battery and "prefer" to run everything single threaded and would run upwards of 2.0ghz "preferring" to be multi-threaded plugged in. That's what I'm waiting for.... the next gen of CULV + Centrino. Can't wait.

By the way, it's pretty sad that even you Anand are making comments on Apple's prices (since you love Apple the way you do). Guess all relationships that are good eventually become more "Love-Hate"Reply

I Wonder what difference can You find between GT330M and GT240M.I checked my GT240M in GPU-Z and looks like i got "GT330M "with higher clocks. In six months i'll probably have GT420M. :)Thanx NVIDIA!Reply

Myself, and a lot of people. I have a late 2006 MacBook Pro that was the first with a Core 2 Duo chip. I have been waiting for the first MacBook pro with a Core i5/i7 processor. This new machine looks exactly like the replacement I have been waiting for. Thank you Anand for the great (and very timely) review.Reply

I buy Macs and am happy to. I run a business and the improved reliability of the Mac means they pay for themselves very quickly. I use my laptop about 8 hours a day (that's on top of my normal work, which I use a Mac Pro for) and any improvement in my workflow is worth a paltry $2000 to my company. If we had PCs at my company I'm sure we'd have a tech guy on payroll who kept things running by now (15 employees). Since I can literally take a hour a month to go around and make sure all updates are run on our Macs instead, there's a pretty clear savings over options we could choose (Windows, "free" Linux etc). Time, convenience, and reliability are actually worth *some* money you know?

Not everyone is a college student/hobbyist/penny pinching type, although clearly you (and other commenters here) are hating for the sake of hating. For the record, I do PC software development and database work on the Mac and love the irony of not having to keep crap PCs around work to get work done. Reply

I'm curious for Anand's (or others') thoughts regarding the glossy screens... I'm looking to get my first MBP, and would prefer the 13" (in spite of the C2D). However, I was hoping for a matte option on the smaller model. Is this litmus test really good enough: indoor = glossy, outdoor = matte? I want the 13" because I'd like to be truly mobile, and thus will be beholden to variable lighting conditions. And so if I'm in a public (indoor) place trying to write or read online, what will my experience be? Or if I'm working on the couch at home with the blinds open (hey, I like sunshine), would the gloss drive me bonkers and cause eye strain? Thanks in advance to all who (hopefully) respond with comments and recommendations.Reply

I have a Dell with the upgraded, glossy screen, and its great in all situations indoors. As long as you can avoid any direct reflections from light sources, a glossy screen is much better indoors, IMO. I've been able to use mine outdoors as well - just need to find some shade. Reply

Actually, if you get the base 15" model, its $150 extra, because they don't offer 320GB HDD at 7200rpm.

That is a complete insult. Not only are these things ridiculously overpriced (and their performance isn't even that great for the price either), their upgrades are an insult. Its not like these are magical iPod HDDs. These are the SAME HDDs available on HP and Dell computers. At HP, you can upgrade from a 160GB 5400RPM HDD to a 250 7200RPM HDD for only $30.

And don't even get me started on their lack of ports. No SD slot on the 17" model? No eSATA? No Blu Ray? Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these laptops intended for the PROfessional field?Reply

As being one of those poor saps that "upgraded" to the previous gen MBP and realized I can only run my Intel 160gb G2 reliably at SATA I speeds, this new laptop makes me wary of going for another round of disappointment... So is it fixed?Reply

I phoned Apple today 3x and couldn't get the answers from them. I did however get the following information.

I'm told that if I install boot camp / Win 7 w/USB Blu-Ray drive I can get 1080P on the LCD panel. BUT what's even more exciting is that the MiniDisplay port, via HDMI Griffin adapter, will fully support 1080P video & DTS-HD, TrueHD audio bistream. The i7-620M has PVAP 1.5 (protected video audio path) which is needed for the HD audio & the 330M is HDCP compliant.

What is even MORE exciting is the possibility of 3D !!! The Geforce 330M supports Nvidia 3D vision.

"The day has finally come. For nearly a year now I’ve been telling everyone who wanted a new MacBook Pro to wait for Arrandale."

Right. But at the end of the review you also said this: "With a Core i5 and GeForce GT 330M, the new MacBook Pro can get uncomfortably warm under use. I found that the previous generation unibody ran cooler. Intel expects to see Arrandale power consumption go down sometime after the middle of the year with a future rev of the processor. I'm guessing that's what'll be used in the inevitable Fall update to the new MacBook Pro lineup."

Are you saying that Apple will do another refresh in about 5 months just because Intel will release another rev of the CPU? And if that happens, do you expect to see a meaningful reduction of heat and perhaps an even better battery performance? In other words, is it really worth the wait?

"You're paying for the design, build quality and ultimately the right to use OS X. If those things don't matter to you (particularly the OS X item) then you'd be much better off with an ASUS or Dell."

Those things do matter to me, a lot, minus the OS X. But I do not see being much better off with an ASUS or Dell precisely because those things matter to me. Grinding my teeth, I would be willing to sacrifice Apple's design and build quality for function, but ASUS, Dell, HP or Sony do not offer the same battery life and screen resolution as Apple's 15 inch laptop. Am I missing something here? And isn't it true that somewhat comparables offerings from Dell and HP, for example, run even hotter than the most recent Apple's 15 inch laptop?

"If you're curious about what's next, I have two words for you: Sandy Bridge. Due out sometime in Q1 2011, Sandy Bridge looks incredible based on early performance data. No word on when we'll see it in notebooks but if you like torturing yourself, waiting for Sandy Bridge will pay off."

I need a laptop, but I do not have to have it right now. Plus, I do not want to pay over $2,000 for a laptop now if it is going to be blown away in a year or so. Could you please elaborate a little on what can we expect to see in terms of design and function assuming Apple implements Sandy Bridge in a future rev of MBPs? Will they be thinner? Will they have a significantly better battery life and run a lot cooler?

P.S. Also, if you were to purchase the current 15 inch MBP, which combination of the CPU, Memory and HD would you choose to stay below $3,000 (closer to $2,500).

"ASUS, Dell, HP or Sony do not offer the same battery life and screen resolution as Apple's 15 inch laptop."

I have to agree with you here. I've been looking around a lot, and while the MBP is expensive, Apple has put together an excellent set of components. They make good choices wrt battery life and performance tradeoffs. The closest thing I can find is the Thinkpad T510 which is a very solid machine, but lacking in 3D graphics performance and I'm not keen on the 16:9 screen. It doesn't have quite the same build quality (though it's still very good) and the batter life isn't quite as good, in part due to the lack of switchable graphics.

I'm hoping to keep the machine for while, so the i7 seems to make sense. Annoyed that the 4GB is 2x2GB, making a future upgrade more expensive than necessary, so I'm debating the 8GB. Would also love an SSD, but I'm thinking that I'll upgrade to that later when the price (hopefully) drops, since I could really use the capacity of the 500GB drive and the Apple SSDs are extremely expensive. Also, the Hi-Res screen is a must for me.Reply

Anand, I read this article yesterday and your conclusion between the i5 and i7 were slightly different, as were a few other points. If you had a change of heart, you should append the changes to the end as opposed to removing your original opinion. It creates the image that 'someone' helped persuade your new opinion.Reply

Since the original publication I got my hands on a Core i7 based 15-inch model. While I expected the clock speed/cache increase to only result in a less-than-10% performance increase, it ended up doing more than that. It's based on this data (and only this data) that I updated the conclusion, I will edit the conclusion to reflect that this change was made however :)

Am I right in assuming that your Left 4 Dead and World of Warcraft tests were done with the i5 15", and not the i7? I assumed this since your info on the GPU there had 256MB, while the i7 MBP has 512MB.

If so, any chance of showing the fps results from these games? If not, an answer to the above would be suffice :)Reply

Importing RAW images is actually more disk bound than it is CPU bound - at least it is in Bibble 5. It usually involves decoding to a low-resolution image and saving a preview which can often be done faster than the disk can read the files. If you're looking for a CPU benchmark then exporting the images to JPEG after you've imported them will likely give you a much better metric on how the CPUs perform.

Also, why not use Bibble 5 as a RAW image benchmark? ;-) I've seen it included in a number of CPU reviews and it runs just as well on Mac OS X as it does under Windows or Linux. Aperture doesn't actually scale very well with multiple CPUs/threads so it isn't a particularly good CPU benchmark now that 2-4 cores is pretty much standard. Also, the nice thing about Bibble as a benchmark is that we actually report the times it takes to run a batch - so you won't have to use a stop watch. ;-)

Don't you think that you should be a bit more open minded? There are a lot of AnandTech readers and many of us look forward to reading the Apple coverage. No one is forcing to read the Apple related material.Reply

Apple computers do a great job at running Windows. I enjoy reading reviews of Apple hardware. If AnandTech hadn't reviewed this crop of MacBook Pros, I would never have know that they fall short of what I expected.

I'd actually like to see a Spring 2010 Laptop shoot out that includes the MBP running the same OS as the rest. It would be a great way to see how Apple hardware stacks up to the rest of what's out there.Reply

My only issue is that, these days, it seems like the only notebook systems that get deemed worthy of Anand's review time are Apple's system. All of the other notebook reviews get dealt out to other writers, but when it comes to Apple-based information/product reviews, only Anand seems to do it/etc. Seems to indicate a favoritism towards Apple on Anand's part.Reply

Would you say that the increased working temperatures in the new MacBooks prohibits its use as a real Laptop? I'm currently using a rev 2.1 MacBook (2.16GHz), and spend 3-6 hours with it in my lap every day, and while it gets too hot if I stress it, surfing the web and doing light work is fine - if the new MBP's run hotter than that, I guess that I shouldn't have waited this long, but have gone for the previous model.TIA,Reply

On page 5 of Anand's review, he notes that OS10 manages the switching between imbedded graphics and the Nvidia board. No user control apparently provided. Question: what happens when you are running bootcamp with Windows 7 as second operating system? Is OS10 lurking in the background to keep this process functioning, or (my concern) does the system just default to the imbedded GPU mode?Reply

RE my prior post it looks like I missed this comment in the review: "Despite using a NVIDIA GPU, there's no support for Optimus under Windows 7 on the new MacBook Pro. The GeForce GT 330M is always in use there regardless of whether you use an Optimus enabled driver or the 196.21 driver that comes with the MacBook Pro." That's the way I would want it given manual control is impossible, but has this been verified by a user/tester? Reply

Great article, but at least one aspect not mentioned:All the Arrandale chips mentioned are the standard voltage M version with 35W TDP. True, this TDP also includes integrated GPU, but still: 35W is a lot for a laptop.

The 18W 640UM, 620Um & 540UM are probably "reserved" for new MacBook Air,

But it would surly be beneficial for MBP to use the 25W LV parts (current lineup lists i7 620LM & 640LM) - any chance Apple would consider using them in MBP?

The new Arrandale revision you mentioned - is this really silicon respin supposed to trim excessive power from the standard voltage M chips, just production process improvement or merely chip binning?Thanks.Reply

I am thinking about bying a 13″ because I like the size and it would be perfekt for me. But I prefer the new i5 processor. Do you think there is a chance that there will come a new 13″ with the i5 processor? Soon? I don´t want to wait too long, but it would be stupid if a new version comes out just after I bought one…Reply

Heading off to Uni in the fall but can't decide between 13" or 15". Which should I get? I'm in the BBA program so I don't think ill be needing Photoshop/Final Cut/etc.?? And I would like it to last for the full 4 years at least. Thanks guys!Reply

I'm a photographer and I'm finally getting ready to switch from PC to Mac. A lot of friends have recommended the 13" mac book pro with the 2.4ghz processor. When i went to the Mac store they were recommending the 15" because of the 2.53GHz intel Core i5...

I see that the 13" now has a 2.66ghz core 2 duo. Do you think there is a big difference between the 13" 2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo vs 15" 2.53GHz ntel Core i5? It's a $500 price difference and i just wondered if it was worth it...THANK YOU!Reply

If you are looking for a macbook to run memory hungry games or to do a lot of photo editing and won't be looking to carry it about everyday then the macbook pro 15 is the one for you. You can buy it here http://www.middletonbanks.com/acatalog/Apple_MacBo... for only £1,240 including VAT and delivery.Reply

If you are looking for a macbook to run memory hungry games or to do a lot of photo editing and won't be looking to carry it about everyday then the macbook pro 15 is the one for you. You can buy it here http://www.middletonbanks.com/acatalog/Apple_MacBo... for only £1,240 including VAT and delivery.Reply